Return land if not used for purpose it was alienated

THERE were reactions from Sarawakians to the proposal by Ampang MP Rodziah Ismail, who had proposed that Malaysia should build another capital city – this time in East Malaysia – to complement Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya.

Sarawak Minister of Tourism, Creative Industry and Performing Arts Dato Sri Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah, in rejecting the proposal outright, stressed that ‘any proposal to establish a third federal capital in Borneo must first address the fate of the long-alienated Bandar 2020 land’.

Was this large piece of Sarawak’s territory near Telaga Air – 2,020 hectares of it – reserved for that capital?

The state government should not alienate any more land to the federal government if the land is not developed for the purpose that it was alienated.

This was done during the time when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammad was the prime minister of Malaysia; the federal government then wanted to build its offices and staff quarters for its employees.

The basic infrastructure was done. The road from Kuching leading to the site was completed; a beautifully-sealed road and a bridge across the Rambungan River was being planned.

I used to drive on that road on my way to and from Lundu.

After a while, the lamp posts were enveloped by green creepers, casting ghostly shadows on a moonlit night.

The land has not been developed at the time of writing this.

YB Abdul Karim wants it reverted to the state, and I agree.

I am not in a position to know about the title conditions of the alienation of that land.

Let’s assume that one of the conditions – apart from the normal term of lease of 60 years, subject to renewal – stipulates that the project must be completed within a certain period of time, say within 18 months.

If these conditions are not complied with, then it appears that there has been a breach of the title condition(s).

For that breach, in normal circumstances, the government may re-enter the land.

During the colonial days in Sarawak, this was called ‘Reverted to Crown’.

However, if there is no breach of the title conditions and the land is still registered in the name of the federal government, then the proprietor of the land may deal with it in the way approved by the government of the state.

I am not aware if there exists government/public policy that disallows direct sale of land to an entity outside Sarawak.

If the Land Registrar approves of the deal, the land changes hands, and we may lose a large territory to a foreign company, or even to a foreigner.

The registered proprietor may use it as a collateral for a loan, if necessary.

If the Registrar approves of the deal, then the property changes hands.

End of a large tract of Sarawak’s prime territory.

Do we want that?

I am assuming that there is no government policy preventing sale to a foreign country or individual non-citizens.

I cannot guess if this was the fear of YB Abdul Karim or any other Sarawakian; it certainly was mine.

In general principle, however, the state government should alienate land to the federal government if that government wants to open offices in all the divisions and most of the districts in Sarawak for the purpose of building offices that render useful services to the community, like the services carried out at the Urban Transformation Centre (UTC) in Kuching.

If your finger print is ‘rosak’ (not clear) and the bank refuses to deal with you, you get a letter from the National Registration Department (NRD) to certify that your name is the same as it is on your MyKAD.

The bank will recognise its authenticity.

If you want to renew your international passport, it will be done at the UTC; renew your driving licence, it will be renewed on the spot, almost immediately.

There are even representatives of insurance companies there to handle matters required by the government agencies stationed there.

A great device whoever thought of it.

We, who live in Kuching, have enjoyed the services given out by these facilities for a couple of decades now.

But Kuching is not Sarawak. Such services should also be enjoyed by the others including those at the ‘outstations’.

In each division or even district in this state, the federal government should have its own building.

Alienating state land for the construction of hospitals, health centres, schools, the Armed Forces, Customs and Immigration, and similar worthy purposes, is to be supported.

There is still a lot that the state government, together with the federal government, should do for the benefit of the people.

If land is required, make it available, with proper controls.

Could it be that YB Rodziah knew about the plan to build another capital on the federal government’s property at the spot that we are referring to?

Her proposal would make sense if she had this parcel of federal land in Sarawak in mind for the capital, since it was available anyway.

That remains the question.

If the land is still registered in the name of the federal government, all transactions like sale and purchase, followed by transfer of ownership of land, must go through the process of registration to be valid.

The title of the next owner will be guaranteed by law – an indefeasible title.

We the people of Sarawak have a right to know what is being done with every inch of our homeland!